Some connection pairs are probably still worth doing anyway, but we won't get the multi million trips a year of a really successful line in many cases. So it's all a much harder sell
From what I know the equivalent stat for the EU is one per two days, so better but still in the same ballpark.
Not having any categories being just a tick above absolute failure is… something to be proud of? Really?
The prognosis is to spend more money building more things. This has been the prognosis every year since the lobbying started. Prior projects built based on this excessive lobbying have since reached end of life this scheme is so old. Now the reports include horror stories of this federal lobbied over building which got poorly maintained: as if the poor maintenance is not the expected result of building more than can be maintained.
Infrastucture funding in the US typically operates such that the federal government gives money to build new stuff, while local governments are left attempting to pay for the maintenance.
Try to find a single page dedicated to identifying over provisioned infrastructure which could be downsized to reduce maintance costs... The ASCE's solution to all problems is to spend more money building more.
It almost doesn't matter. Those jerks are written into law just about everywhere. Even if you wanna build right size or remove oversize they'll get their pound of flesh.
>Understand and adopt new and emerging technologies...
>Embrace proactive approaches to address sustainability, resiliency, and risk...
>Support and encourage airports to look at their systems holistically...
I can't disagree with any of those things, but at the same time nothing in this report helps clarify where we should allocate our ever-more-finite resources.
> We’re spending more than ever on infrastructure—but getting less. This report card isn’t truth. It’s marketing for broken systems.
What’s different about America is that we find different ways of dealing with the crap infrastructure, based on how much we’re willing to spend.
Want to circumvent the awful public transit system? Just pay for an Uber. ($70 JFK to Manhattan vs. the worst experience of your life taking public transit x3 if you’re lucky…)
Not happy with Medicare? Pay for private insurance. (btw - this happens in UK too.)
Public schools not up to par? Pay for your kid to go to private school.
Drinking water icky? No problem, buy some Evian from Whole Foods (Amazon delivers!)
Don’t like your Broadband? Well unfortunately in this case you’re SOL…
Some of this stuff is bad with no alternative, like the bridges and the broadband… those are the weaknesses that worry me. You can’t privatize bridges.
Meanwhile in the UK: trains run nonstop to every city, broadband is 500mbps on average (and $50), healthcare is free (slow, but not much slower than US)… but everything else is same problems and they pay less here.
> American infrastructure is legitimately bad. I say that as someone who grew up there and spent the last half decade in UK.
"the last half decade in UK" -- so what is that, the last 3-5 years? Where did you live? That matters.
> Want to circumvent the awful public transit system? Just pay for an Uber.
Again, USA is a very large place. Which city are you talking about? Only NYC?
> Public schools not up to par? Pay for your kid to go to private school.
What does "up to par" mean? Which public schools, where? The quality varies significantly state-to-state, and even county-to-county.
> Drinking water icky? No problem, buy some Evian from Whole Foods (Amazon delivers!)
Where are you talking about? (we know about Flint, MI)
It’s actually closer to a decade (2016).
> What does "up to par" mean
Honestly idk, I have no kids and I went to the top private school in the US.
> Drinking water icky
I’m just addressing the points of TFA which categorizes infrastructure like this. Me personally, I fill my bottle from the tap (even with “hard water” which is a very UK thing..), and only worry about it to the extent I’ve filled the same bottle for a few months…
toomuchtodo•6mo ago